Leeds City Transport
1950
Leyland Titan PD2/1
Leyland H30/26R

This Leeds City Transport bus is at the Rivelin Dams, Norfolk Arms terminus of Sheffield service 54 whilst on a tour of Sheffield routes on 19th June 1966 organised by The Leeds and District Transport News (still in production today as Metro Transport News). Sheffield 545 which appeared on this site some months ago accompanied the Leeds bus on the tour. The notes provided with the tour suggest that 380 was one of the last of its batch in service.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

---

24/07/11 – 10:53

A vehicle very dear to me – NNW 380 was to become number 13 in the Learner Fleet and was used to weigh up job applicants as it had, of course, a "live" gearbox and clutch. In October 1969 I applied for a job as a "direct driver" and reported to the Swinegate Headquarters at 5.00pm one weekday rush hour. The strict but kindly chap in charge of the Driving School, Senior Inspector Albert Bradley, directed me to 380 in the yard, settled himself in the front passenger seat behind the "missing" window, and off we went into the thick of it. The bus behaved impeccably, like a dream, as we went to Beeston, reversing into an awkward side street on the notoriously steep Beeston Hill (air brakes on the trams) and performing a hill start as well. Then into the long flat Old Lane – by now I was very comfortable indeed and enjoying the trip – where Mr. Bradley said "That’s OK, just go straight down Dewsbury Road back to the yard." I said that I was really enjoying the vehicle and so he said "Oh, well then, go up the Ring Road and through Middleton and Belle Isle and Hunslet." That shows what a genuine and respected gentleman he was, in allowing me to spend an extra few of the Department’s shillings in fuel on a pleasure jaunt !! I suppose in a way I was cheating a little, as I had quite a lot of experience in driving PD2s elsewhere, but I got the job and that involved being a "driver/conductor" for six months – although a chronic shortage of willing drivers and the need to accelerate the One Man Operated conversion programme meant that I did slightly less before qualifying for those.

Chris Youhill

---

24/07/11 – 17:48

The only Leyland bodies bought by Leeds 340-399 entered service in 1949-1950 Mainly allocated to Bramley these were stalwart performers on such routes as the 54 Halton Moor-Rodley and 23 Leeds -Intake for most of their lives. My dad was a conductor for LCT for almost thirty years and always maintained that these were the best buses he ever worked on.
Does any other Leeds bus fan remember the coin tester in the lower saloon ceiling and the huge circulation area at the top of the stairs.
Like a number of AEC Regents these buses retained the old style Leeds blind with via points to the end

Chris Hough

---

25/07/11 – 08:48

AEC man agrees that there is little to compare with an all-Leyland PD2 and I remember coin testers on Sheffield buses – but I had forgotten about them until you jogged my memory!

David Oldfield

---

25/07/11 – 09:03

From personal experience I don’t know much about LCT buses but Chris’s mention of the coin tester reminds me of a similar device that Huddersfield Corporation/JOC used. It was a metal bar about an inch and a half long with various sized slots cut into it for testing the authenticity of coins. It was usually located (on rear entrance buses) on the bulkhead underneath the staircase along with a wood and glass holder which contained (if I remember rightly) a booklet with the Corporation/JOC byelaws and regulations. Strangely, I can’t remember either the coin tester or booklet holder being fitted to front entrance half cab buses. However,this may be due to the fact that on rear entrance buses my favourite seat was the long inward facing seat over the rear near side wheel-arch, thus I was facing the staircase bulkhead and its fittings on most journeys, whereas on front entrance half cabs I would sit anywhere in the lower saloon so wouldn’t always be facing the staircase bulkhead to make the same observations. Has anybody else any memories of riding on "proper" buses.

Eric

---

25/07/11 – 09:04

Well Chris H you certainly have me there !! Having worked on many Leyland bodied PD1s/2s over the years I’ve no idea what a "coin tester" was in the lower saloon ceiling – please let us know. The Bramley vehicles also figured prominently on the 65 Bus Station to Pudsey route, including the days when that service terminated in Rockingham Street. I do, though, well remember the large circulating area upstairs – this was indeed excessive and some operators took advantage of this by putting an extra seat on the offside, thereby increasing the seating capacity to H32/26R. Samuel Ledgard treated most, if not all, of their large fleet of these bodies – new and second hand – in this manner. Even after this the step top area remained adequate for passenger flow. The retention of the original destination blinds caused a wonderful anomaly in later years – Torre Road Depot had a handful of the PD2s and often used them on a teatime peak journey on the 36 route which by then was a different service altogether and went from the Bus Station to Tinshill – still displaying "36 Harehills Oakwood" from the original itinerary in North East Leeds. By the way, although I was at Headingley as a driver and later a "bookman" I did quite frequently work at Bramley and I’m sure I remember your Dad very well indeed – Happy days !!

Chris Youhill

---

25/07/11 – 15:32

The "coin tester" was a small protuberance in the lower deck ceiling at the front of the bus shaped like half an orange split in two and around the size of a large grape I’ve only ever seen this on the Leeds Titans and was told it was a coin tester as a child Leeds were never lavish with bell provision on their buses until the advent of strip bells in the sixties I’ve seen a full bus started away from stops by a sharp rap from a coin on the driver’s bulkhead window on many occasions! One other LCT idiosyncrasy was the provision of a curtain blind on the passenger front bulkhead window for night time running was this unique to Leeds? The one on the drivers bulkhead window often had a small aperture in the top corner for the driver to see the inside of the lower deck.

Chris Hough

---

25/07/11 – 20:57

A blind on the passenger front bulkhead? I remember those in Nottingham in the early 1960s. Always annoyed me because I wanted to look out of the window and pretend to be a driver

A Non

---

25/07/11 – 20:58

Chris, Sheffield had coin testers and the blinds – inside the cab for the driver (with hole) and in the saloon on the nearside.

David Oldfield

---

25/07/11 – 20:59

As far as I’m aware Chris H, night curtains were legally obligatory on both front windows of the old style vehicles.

Chris Youhill

---

27/07/11 – 08:00

I am sure that London Transport RT / RM buses had nearside front window blinds – the ones on RMs didn’t go quite the full width of the window – see photo here //www.ltmcollection.org/images/webmax/xs/i00000xs.jpg
I can’t remember them being used in the 70s or later

Jon

---

27/07/11 – 12:07

This batch of LCT Titans always fascinated me as we drove through the Bramley area from Bradford on a frequent basis, and they always seemed to be concentrated in that area of Leeds.
As a Bradford lad, I was always fascinated by the differences compared to our own BCPT Titans.
The NNW series were almost to Farington style, with flush mounted fully radiused windows, and no rain shields, giving an ultra modern look which seemed enhanced by the 7ft.6ins. width. Most contemporary Titans at that time did not have this modernised "cleaned up" look, and I am wondering if LCT played some part in the development programme which led up to the Farington style which became more common with the advent of the post 1951 longer chassis.
Or did Leyland offer this style at this early date, and, if so, which other fleets received them on PD2/1 or PD2/3 chassis in 1949/50?
They were certainly very handsome vehicles, and, like all Leyland bodies, had a good life span.

John Whitaker

---

28/07/11 – 06:16

There has been a lot of misunderstanding about the so-called "Farington style" Leyland bodies. The latest thinking is that the name refers to this version rather than the later one. I do agree that it is visually enhanced by the 7’6" width when compared to, say Manchester’s "salmon tins", one of which is seen here //www.sct61.org.uk/mn3290.htm  Southport also had some, see //www.sct61.org.uk/sp106a.htm and Sheffield //www.sct61.org.uk/sh621.htm  and I’m sure there were others.

Peter Williamson

---

28/07/11 – 15:20

This style IS the Farington – experts now tell us that the final version is NOT. There does not, however seem to be a name for it. Sheffield had two batches of true Faringtons, like these Leeds examples, in 1949 – so they were not an exclusive, nor an experimental model.

David Oldfield

---

28/07/11 – 15:22

I’ve always understood that this version was known as the ‘Farington style’ Perhaps the reason that many people applied the same name (incorrectly) to the later and final version was simply because no one ever gave it a name of it’s own. I must say that the Southport example looks particularly fine!

Chris Barker

---

28/07/11 – 15:24

John W mentions he always saw lots of Leyland bodied Titans in the Bramley area. This was definitely home ground to these buses as most of them spent their entire working lives at Bramley depot which for most of its postwar existence was 100% Leyland. It got its first 30ft long vehicles (PD3A/2) in 1962/63
Bramley was a former tram depot which presented some operating problems the main being the fact that being built on a hill the ground sloped away from the original entrance on Henconneer Lane To ease access and manoeuvrability problems a second exit was made but this needed a ramp to ground level.
The original depot was closed and demolished in 1969 being replaced by a large purpose built one a few hundred yards away this is still in use by First.

Chris Hough

---

30/07/11 – 07:57

Sheffield had 64 ‘Farington’ style Leyland bodies in all, spread over all three fleets, 52 in the ‘A’, 10 sprinkled throughout the jointly owned ‘B’, and 2 in the ‘C’ fleet which was wholly owned by British Railways. Interestingly they were all painted in a variation of the standard Sheffield livery, which for many years came to be reserved for ‘Farington’ bodied Titans and anything with a body from Charles H. Roe!
Ironically, when LCT 380 came to town on its enthusiast’s excursion, it was one of the the first batch of Sheffield PD2’s, dating from 1947, that accompanied it around the city! Despite the body on STD 545 KWA545 being only two years older than the first ‘Farington’s,’ the contrast between it and the very elegant Leeds machine was stark, to say the least.

Dave Careless

---

08/08/11 – 10:20

MEMORIES !!
I was a "Bramley Lad" in the 60s and these bus’s were VERY close to my heart as my Dad drove for the Bramley Depot!
I have fond and vivid memories of the move to the new Towns End Depot, there was a very exciting open day where we got to ride the new one man bus’s through the Bus Wash !!! We lost Dad 3 years ago, I wish we had found this forum before he went he would have filled this sight with Facts and Figures.

Graham Morton

---

02/08/12 – 07:22

I’m surprised no one mentioned that some members of the 340-399 batch of Leylands were fixtures on the 38 Moortown-Whitkirk from many years between 1949 and at least 1956; I rode the route fairly frequently, waited for buses and trams at Moortown corner at least twice daily and remember seeing nothing else on that route, though I know other types did show up occasionally.

Andrew Young

---

02/08/12 – 11:25

There were in fact only a very small handful of the batch allocated to Torre Road Depot – a strange situation really, as you would have thought an "all at Bramley" allocation would have better suited their manual transmission specification. The 38 service, on a half hourly frequency and one hour a round trip, required only two vehicles and so its not really surprising that the "NNW"s gave the impression of being the universal type.

Chris Youhill

---

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

---

15/11/15 – 16:14

I worked at Bramley depot and drove on the 54, 65 and 77 routes. It was these routes that helped me learn how to do "snatch" gear changes, especially on Kirkstall Hill. The only problem with these buses was brake fade, after two applications of the footbrake (no air brakes) the vacuum brakes were useless. I can recall having a brand new Mini brake suddenly in front of me, and I hit it from the rear making it a "short wheelbase" Mini. I will always remember the PD2/1s as being a sturdy vehicle.

David Thorpe

---

16/11/15 – 05:37

I agree with you wholeheartedly David regarding the vacuum brakes on the PD2s – and believe me the brakes on the 30 foot elegant PD3s were even worse. As local folks will know, The Leeds PD3s in their time bore the brunt of the extremely busy Moortown/Roundhay/Middleton/Belle Isle former tram routes and I’ve had some alarming near misses with them when fully laden, and I think I can honestly claim not have been a "nutter" putting timekeeping above all else like some ill advised chaps did. I’ve driven PD2s/PD3s for several operators and the same problem has arisen with them all, and I’m sure that this was n reflection on maintenance – it was simply a characteristic of the Leyland design. In fact a very good friend of mine, a conscientious driver, had his own method of ensuring that the PD3s would stop safely – on approaching every stop he would apply maximum revs and execute a faultless change down from top to third – I doubt if this reflected favourably on fuel consumption but I’m sure that LCT could stand that due to their well known "run ’em on fresh air" policy. Now very oddly, I’ve driven a heck of lot of PD1s – one of my very favourite models and very appealing too – but their brakes always seemed far more up to the job. This is most strange because in size, weight and passenger capacity they were virtually the same as the PD2 and no doubt had similar or identical braking systems. Despite the enormous and widespread success and popularity of the PD2s/PD3s this aspect will no doubt remain a mystery for ever.

Chris Youhill

---

16/11/15 – 15:22

I paid a visit to the excellent Dewsbury Bus Museum open day yesterday. The highlight for me was a trip on the superbly restored West Riding lowbridge all Leyland PD2/1. What a tribute to Leyland quality – and I’d forgotten that Leyland pre dated the lightweight Orion with no interior panels below the upper deck waist rail. David comments on the all Leylands being a sturdy vehicle, this is borne out by my experience of the Sheffield buses of this type, especially the 1947/8 builds with the polished interior wood finish. Chris Y comments on brake performance on PD2s and PD3s. My experience is that the air braked PD2 was ok, the air braked PD3 less so. Spare a thought for drivers with the sole vacuum braked PD3/3 with PMT (see elsewhere on this site for H811) whilst all its brethren were air braked.

Ian Wild

---

17/11/15 – 11:01

Most interesting views Ian, and to be honest I’ve never driven an air braked PD2, all mine have been vacuum – apart perhaps for the one "RTL" that I drove, that being one of the ten Leeds City Transport preselector models 301 – 310. I had booked overtime at a different garage to my own in order to enjoy such a drive when the class of ten was down to two of three. I was so delighted by the experience that I don’t recall any issue with the brakes on the three hour piece of rather "gentle" work, consisting of dead mileage and duplicates.

Chris Youhill

---

17/11/15 – 13:40

I recall a photo of an impeccable SL "RT" on the roof of a garage, some time ago, Chris Y. You’ve also driven an "RTL". What characteristics were different between the two? Or maybe you don’t remember, so relaxing was the experience with the RTL!

Could someone explain what the little white oblong box under the canopy, centre-front was all about?

Chris Hebbron

---

18/11/15 – 07:18

Chris H – well in simple terms Chris "everything was different" as with any AEC/Leyland comparison. The Leyland steering was far more positive and the AEC steady tickover produced a totally different effect from the flywheel/gearbox than did the delightful "hunting and gentle wobbling" of the Leyland. I don’t know if there was much difference in top speed but perhaps the Leyland might have just had the edge, and certainly had less tendency to alarming leaning when loaded. Both vehicles of course wonderful and highly successful in their different ways, such is the delight of variety. The rooftop garage that you mention would of course be Armley – the rooftop park was exactly the same size as the garage beneath and must have been capable of carrying an unbelievable weight. When Samuel Ledgard died in 1952 practically every withdrawn vehicle from Day One was up there – yes, including the original charabancs from 1912 – if only the preservation funds and movement had been as prolific then !!
Regarding the picture of NNW 380 in this topic, the little white box is the illuminated "Limited" sign – a moderately successful device for discouraging passengers from boarding on certain peak services where boarding and alighting stops were "limited" for the benefit of longer distance passengers. Quite a number of the blighters though were adept at taking a calculated risk by paying the minimum fare applicable but baling out in the heavy traffic which they knew was to be expected – they considered that the dearer fare was worth it for a quicker journey home. This was really anti social in perhaps the same way as people nowadays who operate pelican crossings and then cross against the red man causing traffic to halt for nothing later.

Chris Youhill

---

18/11/15 – 07:20

I asked this in another forum a couple of weeks ago Chris, and was informed it was to display ‘LIMITED STOP’.

Stephen Howarth

---

18/11/15 – 07:27

Even I can tell you that the little white oblong box could be illuminated to say "Limited", Chris.
My memories of LCT were certainly these and those bare metal engine covers, which seemed to appear about the time of the tram replacement scheme in the 1950’s. That’s why that similarly treated "classic" Crossley is a mystery: as well as a few cranked seats, did other 50’s Leeds buses have rearward facing front bulkhead seats?
Did you notice, too, that the 1952 Regent III in the Gallery is from Roe’s big window period, whilst the Daimler/Orion shows, by contrast, what a miserable looking design these were. Good Pics though.
What a smart livery, anywhere, any bus. Progress is not inevitable…pink and puce?

Joe